Ethanol

[Romans5.8]

Originally Posted by Scott_in_TX

I really like that last statement!

A significant portion of the current "eco" movement is more motivated by profit than by finding workable solutions.
Pass a regulation here and there and the next thing you know; you too could be making millions by planting trees in another country.
*real trees may or may not actually be planted
*void where prohibited by common sense
*at participating legislatures only

Just a couple of points.

I have owned more Fords than other vehicles; I am most familiar with their operation and maintenance. I generally look at Fords first because I am comfortable with them. However; I currently own a GMC a Dodge and a Kawasaki. No Ford.

I think internal combustion technology is nearing its peak. We don't use the best technology; usually because it smells worse, or we worry about future availability of parts and maintenance.
And I think there is an view that exhaust smoke = more pollution = lower fuel efficiency. I really don't think most people realize that diesels get better MPG.

I guess marketing could correct that; but when does marketing really try to educate?

I don't think there are more than a handful of advertisements that use facts and reason to convince you to buy their product.

Expensive cars tend to show that you can enjoy your retirement more or pick up classy women with one of their cars.
Sports cars and small trucks mean that you will have lots of friends that party and get hot scantily clad women.
Mid sized sedans mean a great family life, beautiful wife and precocious children.

The E.D. pills are the best commercials though. If you use Viagra you will have a 3 day old shave and be a problem solver; but there will be NO WOMEN around.
If you chose Cialis; it will give you an outdoor bath fetish. You will be in separate tubs; but at least there will be a great view and a Woman.

Scott

Right. The solution is a pipe dream that will never happen; consumers educating themselves and NOT relying on marketing. Then, the focus would be the best product, not the best advertisement.

I'm a Ford guy too, I'll admit it, but I definitely take a look at the other guys. Ford has to earn my business, they don't just get to have it! Right now I have a Ford Taurus and a Saturn. I like them both, but the Ford is certainly the better riding car, but the Saturn's fuel economy sure is nice...

I agree that the eco movement is motivated by profit, and that can work to their advantage! We all want the same thing, to do more with less money. Not a single one of us WANTS to spend more money on fuel. So rather than regulating weird emissions requirements or fuel starving exhaust systems, CONSUMERS can push the market to more efficient vehicles. The same vehicles, getting better gas mileage. You can have your pickup truck, full size sedan or compact car, but it will get better gas mileage than your old one. Less fuel being burned certainly makes the eco folks happy, and EVERYONE would be happy with spending less money on fuel. Living in a rural area fuel is a very significant part of my budget. My wife recently got a job closer to us, but before she was working an hour away and fuel was costing us $150 a week! (And that was including her riding her bike to work on occasion) When I go out to buy my next car, I will have a lot of things to consider, but fuel economy will be one of them. If I can get the type of car I'm looking for (probably another sedan) that gets better fuel economy than the other guy and with comparable features and reliability, that'll get my business. Capitalism at work. I'll buy the better product for the price I intend to spend.

[Scott_in_TX]

Originally Posted by Romans5.8

We all want the same thing, to do more with less money. Not a single one of us WANTS to spend more money on fuel.

I guess I should have said "a portion of the "eco" movements leadership".

They do want us to spend more money on fuel.
LOTS of them are on record making those statements.

The profit motive they are concerned with is not saving a thousand dollars or so a year on fuel.

They are concerned with selling carbon credits; getting tax dollars for mixing ethanol. Forcing refineries to buy MTBEs. Taking tax payer backed loans to build solar panels; or getting a million dollar grant to study why eating beef destroys the ozone layer.

Most people want to reduce pollution.
Some people want to profit greatly from regulations.

Scott

[Papa Smrph]

Just as a clarification, I did not advocate an artificial raising of the cost of fuel by anyone, government or otherwise. I simply suggested that if a price point is reached that is high enough, it will cause people to evaluate what they need in the form of transportation.
I don't know what that price point is, however it seems logical to me that if we could get folks to downsize where possible, an overall reduction in fuel consumption would occur.

[Scott_in_TX]

Originally Posted by Papa Smrph

Just as a clarification, I did not advocate an artificial raising of the cost of fuel by anyone, government or otherwise. I simply suggested that if a price point is reached that is high enough, it will cause people to evaluate what they need in the form of transportation.
I don't know what that price point is, however it seems logical to me that if we could get folks to downsize where possible, an overall reduction in fuel consumption would occur.

Glad to hear that Smrph!

People do start to change their views when it hits them in the pocketbook. And we did get some changes for the better the last time.

However, we also got a lot of other problems.
Price increases for all durable goods for one; then an economic strain on the middle class had terrible repercussions.

Check out this graph of fuel prices from 05 to 10. There is a lot to be learned from that spike in the summer of 08!

Scott